On Android Firefox, you can just use the share button from the browser context menu for that site.

there’s your difference

Edtit: oh, you mean quality-wise? Idk, i’ve never played Vintage Story.

but is it FOSS?

There’s also ClassiCube.

It’s basically a FOSS C-reimplementation of the very old Minecraft version.

Right, and what would also be nice is to be able to export articles in different formats, for example markdown, to conveniently read them in your favourite reader application.

They have over a billion excess homes.

Which is good, because it keeps costs of living down, amiright?

I disagree. Especially on the internet, it can often be very difficult to say what is sarcasm and what is not. This is mostly because of the wildly diverse opinions that people have.

Not every observation has to result in a conclusion.

Cannot confirm.

I use google maps regularly, and it mostly works fine.

However, google search engine (and youtube recommendations) have gone on a steeply downhill rollercoaster ride. Nowadays, I have difficulty researching even the most basic topics on Google, because it is so clustered with ads that I cannot tell anymore whether any website is genuine or trying to scam me.

We need a google that uses AI/ML to hunt and de-rank the 1800 word essay web pages that answer the question, “how long should you microwave a baked potato for?”

“In 1863, county cork in Ireland, Shamus O’Toole created the world first commercial potato farm. He’d go on to…”

Exactly what it feels like if I’m asked to “write an 700-word article” somehow. Most of it is just filler material, really.

Edgy comment here but:

In another thread we were discussing AI-generated CSAM. Thread:

https://feddit.de/post/6315841

You would probably agree, then, that such material is not problematic, because even if it looks like CSAM, and it quacks like CSAM, it is not CSAM, therefore we don’t have to take it seriously or regulate it in similar ways that we do regulate actual CSAM, if I continue your logic, no?

I believe that at a certain point, “agency” is an emergent feature. That means that, while all the single bits are well understood probability-wise, the total picture is still more than that.

It makes sense to me to accept that if it looks like a duck, and it quacks like a duck, then it is a duck, for a lot (but not all) of important purposes.

I disagree. This is no meaningful talking point. It doesn’t help anyone in practice. Sure, it clears legal questions of responsibility (and I’m not even sure about that one in the future), but apart from that, making an artificial distinction between a human and a looks-and-acts-like-human, provides no real-world value.

deleted by creator

Meanwhile in China:

https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-chinas-emissions-set-to-fall-in-2024-after-record-growth-in-clean-energy/

Probably even if the data is incomplete or fragmented, humans can still draw value from it.

Bullshit.

It should instead read:

“Humans were stupid and taught a ChatBot how to cheat and lie.”

Thanks, this was a very good insight. No matter how good the person, if they are under pressure, they are still going to make the wrong decisions. This is why we should stay away from them as much as possible.

But a job that is mostly shifting information around, be it spreadsheets, phone calls or art, all of that is slowly getting into reach of being done by AI.

Seems rather fast to me.

yes, that was it. Quite shocking to watch. I think that these things will be very real in maybe ten years. I’m quite afraid of it.